↓ Skip to main content

Estimating the Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness against Medically Attended Influenza in Clinical Settings: A Hospital-Based Case-Control Study with a Rapid Diagnostic Test in Japan

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Estimating the Influenza Vaccine Effectiveness against Medically Attended Influenza in Clinical Settings: A Hospital-Based Case-Control Study with a Rapid Diagnostic Test in Japan
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2013
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0052103
Pubmed ID
Authors

Motoi Suzuki, Hiroyuki Yoshimine, Yoshitaka Harada, Naho Tsuchiya, Ikumi Shimada, Koya Ariyoshi, Kenichiro Inoue

Abstract

Influenza vaccine effectiveness (VE) studies are usually conducted by specialized agencies and require time and resources. The objective of this study was to estimate the influenza VE against medically attended influenza using a test-negative case-control design with rapid influenza diagnostic tests (RIDT) in a clinical setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 42 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 19%
Student > Master 8 19%
Researcher 7 16%
Other 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 7 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 44%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 12%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Mathematics 1 2%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 9 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 July 2019.
All research outputs
#15,261,106
of 22,693,205 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#130,010
of 193,724 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,553
of 282,285 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#3,080
of 4,925 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,693,205 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 193,724 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.0. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 282,285 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,925 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.